Mashing in the mid 19th century

This is an extract from the 1850 to 1880 chapter of "Beer, Ale and Malt Liquor". The three-mash scheme described here was already obsolescent by the 1850s, with simpler systems becoming more popular. As the Scottish method of sparging spread to England.

Water was heated to 184º F in the liquor copper and transferred to the mash tun. When the water had cooled to about 180º F the malt was dropped from the hopper into the mash tun and mixed well with the water.

The precise mashing temperature varied depending on the type of water, malt and the brewer's preference. In general, hard water required a lower temperature. (Source: "The Brewer" by William Loftus, 1856, pages 34-35.)

In mild weather, these were the striking temperatures recommended by Loftus:

Mid-19th century multiple mash scheme
	hard water	soft water
1st mash	178º F	182º F
2nd mash	184º F	188º F
3rd mash	188º F	186º F
Source:
"The Brewer" by William Loftus, 1856, page 36.

The first mash lasted at least two hours, longer as long as the temperature could be kept above 146º F. The remaining two mashes were between one and two hours. (Source: "The Brewer" by William Loftus, 1856, page 37.)

The third mash was either mixed with the other two worts, kept as a return for a later brew of used to make Table Beer.  (Source: "The Brewer" by William Loftus, 1856, page 38.)

Any remaining extract left in the grains could be retrieved by mixing with water (one barrel for every 1.25 quarters of malt) at a temperature of 198º F. After strirring and allowing the mash to stand for 30 minutes, it was put into the copper with some spent hops and, with the fire damped, allowed to stand all night. By the next day, evaporation had reduced the volume by a third and brought the gravity up tp 1022-25º. This was used to make a Table Beer.  (Source: "The Brewer" by William Loftus, 1856, page 39.)

Loving Montevideo

Lots if cool 1929s  bullrings, Some cool food and drink.

But it's all al about showing the kids an alternative of European Society.  One that went a sightly different way.

Some is beautiful. There are lots of art-deco-ey 20s buildings here way better than in Europe

It's a Europe which could have been.

Much like modern Ireland a an England that could have been. They'd sorted out the racism and the trains.

Cairnes Single Stout 1914 - 1923

I've been trudging my way through Cairnes records or the last couple of weeks. Has it been fun? Instructional, perhaps.

Specifically, the interwar years and, one of my favourites, WW I. I hadn't seen a set of Irish records from WW I before. I knew that they were going to look different from English or Scottish ones. For the simple reason that the rules weren't the same.

In April 1918, the average gravity of a brewer's beers in Great Britain was limited to just 1030º, while in Ireland it was 1045º. I think this was simply because pre-war, average OG had been higher in Ireland: 1066º compared to 1052º in England.

You can see in the two tables that Cairnes Single Stout never fell below 1039º during the war. While Fullers Porter dropped to 1027.5º in 1918. Interestingly, Cairnes Single Stout hhit its nadir in 1920-1921. A time when the gravity of Fullers Porter was starting to bounce back. Though, by later in the 1920s, the two beers had near identical gravities.

The rate of attenuation of Cairnes Single Stout fell during the war, due to the FG being maintained at the same level. This was, presumably, to maintain the body. This doesn't seem to have occurred at Fullers.

The hopping rate at Cairnes almost halved in the middle of the war, from 7.6 lbs per quarter (336 lbs)) of malt to just 4.25 lbs. At Fullers, on the other hand, it remained pretty constant at between 6 lbs and 7 lbs per quarter. 

Cairnes Single Stout 1914 - 1923
Date	Year	OG	FG	ABV	App. Atten-uation	lbs hops/ qtr	hops lb/brl
1st Jan	1914	1050	1014	4.76	72.00%	7.60	1.34
1st Sep	1914	1050	1014.5	4.70	71.00%	6.70	1.27
7th Jan	1915	1052	1012	5.29	76.92%	6.61	1.17
2nd Oct	1916	1046	1012	4.50	73.91%	4.25	1.05
3rd May	1917	1048	1012	4.76	75.00%	4.25	1.55
7th Jun	1917	1046	1012	4.50	73.91%	6.92	1.13
1st Nov	1917	1046	1012.5	4.43	72.83%	6.92	1.08
3rd Jan	1918	1046	1014	4.23	69.57%	6.74	1.02
2nd May	1918	1039	1012	3.57	69.23%	7.54	0.97
3rd Oct	1918	1039	1013	3.44	66.67%	7.54	0.97
3rd Feb	1919	1039	1013	3.44	66.67%	7.54	0.98
2nd Oct	1919	1039	1012.5	3.51	67.95%	7.69	0.98
1st Jan	1920	1039	1012	3.57	69.23%	7.92	1.04
15th Apr	1920	1039	1013	3.44	66.67%	7.62	0.97
4th Oct	1920	1037	1012	3.31	67.57%	7.64	0.94
3rd Oct	1921	1037	1013	3.18	64.86%	7.60	0.98
2nd Feb	1922	1041	1014	3.57	65.85%	7.56	1.21
1st Jan	1923	1042	1014	3.70	66.67%	7.07	1.10
Sources:
Cairnes brewing records held at the Guinness archives, document numbers GDB/SUB/0022 and GDB/BR17/1257.

Fullers Porter 1914 - 1925
Date	Year	OG	FG	ABV	App. Atten-uation	lbs hops/ qtr	hops lb/brl
18th Nov	1914	1045.5	1012.5	4.37	72.59%	6.74	1.38
17th Feb	1915	1043.8	1010.8	4.37	75.35%	6.33	1.34
2nd Jun	1916	1043.0	1010.8	4.26	74.89%	6.23	1.43
4th Aug	1916	1039.1	1010.0	3.86	74.50%	6.63	1.38
12th Apr	1917	1044.2	1010.0	4.52	77.42%	7.24	1.48
9th Aug	1917	1035.5	1007.8	3.66	78.13%	7.54	1.23
5th Jan	1918	1035.9	1010.0	3.43	72.24%	6.81	1.26
19th Apr	1918	1027.5	1007.2	2.69	73.84%	6.41	0.97
14th Jan	1919	1027.8	1010.2	2.33	63.18%	6.83	0.74
10th Feb	1920	1034.2	1007.2	3.57	78.95%	7.02	1.13
16th Jun	1925	1041.5	1015.5	3.44	62.62%	7.95	1.55
Source:
Fullers rewing records hheld at the brewery.

Football pilgrimage

Dropped by one of the most historically significant football grounds in the world today.

It was dead cool. Slightly weird that they have an Amsterdam stand. Until you look into it more closely.

And found a can of Porter in a shop around the corner from my hotel.

A winning day.

Let's Brew Wednesday - 1914 Cairnes Double Stout

There have been quite a few changes to Double Stout since 1900. Starting with a slight, 2º, reduction in gravity.

Then there’s the recipe. Where the patent malt has been replaced by roast barley. It’s hard to tell exactly when this happened, as the pre-printed brewing book pages had “Patent malt” hard-coded in them. Occasionally crossed out and with “Roast Barley” written in.

It’s a similar story with BPG (Beane’s Patent Grist), which is crossed out and “Glucose” written in. At least it means I’m certain o the type of sugar being used. Which isn’t the case with earlier recipes.

There’s no mention of caramel. But I suspect some must have been in the mix. Given that the calculated colour is so pale: about the same as Dark Mild. Which seems far too pale for a Double Stout.

The hops were evenly split between English and Oregon, both from the 1913 harvest. 

1914 Cairnes Double Stout
pale malt	10.50 lb	71.19%
roast barley	1.00 lb	6.78%
flaked maize	2.00 lb	13.56%
glucose	1.25 lb	8.47%
Cluster 120 mins	2.50 oz
Fuggles 60 mins	1.25 oz
Fuggles 30 mins	1.25 oz
OG	1067
FG	1023
ABV	5.82
Apparent attenuation	65.67%
IBU	67
SRM	21
Mash at	153º F
Sparge at	170º F
Boil time	120 minutes
pitching temp	59.5º F
Yeast	Wyeast 1084 Irish ale

Montevideo

 Foggy and overcast. Andrew is loving it. His sort of weather.

Restrictions on roasting malt

Following up on my posts about UK beer legislation, here's more detail on theh law concerning roast malt.

You may be wondering: why the hhell were the rules so strict? Basically because the governement was paranoid. And were afraid that brewers would us unmalted grains. Thus dodging tax. These rules effectively made malt roasting a specialist occupation. At least, until 1880.

"AN ACT to provide Regulations for preparing and using Roasted Malt in colouring Beer.

(18th June 1842.)

ABSTRACT OF THE ENACTMENTS.

1. Prohibiting the roasting of malt for sale, or the selling thereof except by persons duly licensed.

2. Roasters of malt and dealers in roasted malt to take out a licence. — Penalty.

3. Duty on licences to be under the management of the Commissioners of Excise, who shall grant the same.

4. Roasters of malt to make entry of their premises and utensils.—Penalty.

5. Roasters of malt to mark their premises and utensils corresponding to their entry.

6. Officers of Excise empowered to enter the premises of roasters of malt.

7. Roasters of malt not to receive any other grain than unroasted malt, and dealers no other than roasted malt.—Penalty.

8. A malt book to be delivered to every roaster of malt and dealer in roasted malt, in which they shall respectively enter all malt received, roasted, and sent out by them.

9. Stock account of malt to be taken.

10. Book may be made up before taking the account, and malt in the cylinders may be included.

11. Malt not to be roasted at night.

12. A certificate book to he delivered to every roaster of malt, and all roasted malt to be sent out by certificate.— Penalty.

13. Brewers intending to use roasted malt to provide deposit rooms in which all roasted malt to be deposited, and the certificate delivered up to the officer of Excise.—Penalty.

14. All malt received by any roaster shall be roasted on his premises; and all roasted malt shall be sent out unground.

15. No roasted malt to be bought of any but a licensed roaster.

16. No maltster at his malt house, or within one mile of it, or any druggist or grocer, to be a roaster of malt or dealer in roasted malt.

17. Power of Commissioners to except maltsters whose premises were within prohibited distance before 1st April 1842.

18. Roasters, &c. of malt subject to like prohibitions as to the custody, &c. of certain articles, &c. as brewers of, or dealers in, or retailers of beer.

19. Act may be altered this session."
"The public general acts, Volume 1902", pages 79-80.

Provision 16 effectively prohibits a maltster from roasting. That, along with provision 14, insisting that roast malt be sent out unground seem to be designed to stop maltsters just roasting raw barley. I assume if it's ground it would be harder to tell if it had been malted or not.

The insistence that roasters bought in barley that had already been malted, and on which the tax had already been paid, was similarly designed to prevent the roasting o unmalted grains.

Not sure why roasting at night was prohibited. But it's probably something to do with preventing tax dodging. As that's what everything else is about.

Summary of UK brewing legislation (part two)

Today it's the rest o my cut-out-and-keep guide to 19th-ccentury UK brewing legislation. Which isn't quite so sugar-heavy this time.

1880, with the Free Mash Tun Act, was a huge dividing line in brewing legislation. Many of the old rules - designed to stop brewers dodging tax by using any fermentable material other than malt - ell by the wayside.

31st July 1865 - 30th April 1874
Brewers prohibited from using a mixture of glucose and treacle.

30th April 1874
The definition of sugar extended to mean any description of sugar, including any saccharine substance or syrup manufactured from any material from which sugar can be manufactured. The use of sugar to make beer colouring also allowed.

14th August 1855 - 30th September 1880
Storage of unmalted grain in a brewery prohibited except for: grain in a malt house; oats or beans for horse food kept in a specific place. Malt only to be crushed by metal rollers with smooth surfaces which were not fluted.

11th October 1862 - 30th September 1880
Brewers of spruce or black beer exempted from new rates of license duty on brewers provided that they used no hops or yeast in making them.

16th September 1862
Duties on hops repealed. Prohibition on hop substitutes removed, also the restrictions on importing extracts, essences and other preparations of hops. This was only extended to Ireland on 25th July 1864.

1st October 1880
"Free mash tun " Act. Duty imposed at 6s 3d per standard barrel of 1057º. All restriction on ingredients removed except those on drugs and harmful substances.

16th May 1888
The use of "saccharin" (a product of coal tar) prohibited.

16th April 1889
A standard barrel changed to 1055º.

17th April 1894
Duty per standard barrel raised to 6s 9d.

1st October 1896
Rice, flaked maize and other similar products, which had been classified as malt or corn with regard to their wort-producing powers reclassified as "sugar".
Source: "Report and minutes of evidence Departmental Committee on Beer Materials, 1899, page 382. 

Notice how strict the rules were on unmalted grains. And the weird rules about mill rollers. I've absolutely no idea why fluted rollers weren't allowed. Maybe that's what you'd use for unmalted grains.

Loving Santiago

The kids, too.We get to ride the metro everywhere. They drink beer, I drink pisco sour. We get to shiver together in the unheated pubs. It's like being back in the 1970s. But in a good way.

Montevideo tomorrow.

Summary of UK brewing legislation (part one)

Something a bit different today. Really a reference guide, rather than anything else. For any budding beer historian who doesn't feel like digging through all the parliamentary statutes.

You'll notice that quite a lot o it relates to sugar in brewing. Which was a tricky subject for the government. Big fluctuations in the duty on sugar used in brewing must discouraged brewers from using it.

Whitbread, for example, briefly flirted with sugar when it was first allowed in 1847. But soon dropped it again and didn't readopt it until 1865. Barclay Perkins, other than in the occasional cheap beer, didn't use sugar before the 1880 Free Mash Tun Act.

1st May 1802 - 20th June 1811
No materials other than malt, hops and water allowed.

26th June 1811 - 5th July 1817
Porter brewers were allowed to use a solution of burnt brown sugar to colour Porter only.

6th July 1817
The burnt colouring solution was forbidden and only malt, hops and water were allowed. Brewers, retailers and dealers of beer were not allowed to possess sugar nor certain specified drugs and adulterants.

11th October 1827
The rules from 6th July 1817 also applied to Ireland.

16th July 1830
Beer duties abolished. Brewers prohibited from having raw or unmalted grain on their premises.

18th June 1842
The use of roasted or black malt in brewing first recognised in law.  Strict rules on the manufacture, sale and storage of black malt were introduced. There was further legislation on this topic in 1856 and 1857. All these were repealed in 1880. 

23rd February 1847
The use of sugar (but not molasses or other types of sugar on which the full duties had not been paid) allowed in the brewing of beer and in the preparation of colouring material for beer.

6th July 1851
A duty of 1s 4d per cwt. introduced on sugar used in brewing.

10th July 1854
Duty on sugar used in brewing raised to 6s 6d per cwt.

1855
Duty on sugar used in brewing reduced to 3s 9d per cwt.

5th July 1856 - 15th April 1864
Collection of duty on sugar used in brewing held in abeyance.

16th April 1864
A duty of 3s 4d per cwt. imposed on sugar used in brewing.

30th April 1867
Duty on sugar used in brewing raised to 3s 6d per cwt.

12th April 1870
Duty on sugar used in brewing raised to 7s 6d per cwt.

8th May 1873
Duty on sugar used in brewing raised to 9s 6d per cwt.

30th April 1874
Duty on sugar used in brewing raised to 11s 6d per cwt.

30th September 1880
Duty on sugar used in brewing repealed.
Source: "Report and minutes of evidence Departmental Committee on Beer Materials, 1899, page 382.

In 1830, when the taxation on beer was purely on malt and hops, restrictions came in on having unmalted grains in a brewery. As their use would be dodging tax.

Let's Brew - 1914 Cairnes Bitter Ale

The replacement for E.I. Ale has the much more understandable brewhouse name of B. Ale. Which I’m pretty sure stands for Bitter Ale.

And an Ordinary Bitter is what it looks like. Something along the lines of Barclay Perkins XLK. The difference being that Cairnes brewed a lot less o their beer. Both in absolute terms and as a percentage of all the beer they brewed.

The main difference with E.I. Ale, other than a 5º, drop in gravity, is the appearance of an adjunct in the grist. Namely, flaked something, which I’ve guessed at being maize. There’s an equally vague type of sugar. Which I’ve conservatively guessed at being No. 2 invert.

Guess what the hops are? Yes, exactly the same as all the other beers: half Oregon, half English, both from the 1912 season.  

1914 Cairnes Bitter Ale
pale malt	6.75 lb	67.50%
flaked maize	1.25 lb	12.50%
No. 2 invert sugar	2.00 lb	20.00%
Cluster 120 mins	2.00 oz
Fuggles 60 mins	1.00 oz
Fuggles 30 mins	1.00 oz
Goldings dry hops	1.00 oz
OG	1050
FG	1013
ABV	4.89
Apparent attenuation	74.00%
IBU	64
SRM	9
Mash at	154º F
Sparge at	168º F
Boil time	120 minutes
pitching temp	58.5º F
Yeast	Wyeast 1084 Irish ale

Dry-hopping

It's amusing that some modern drinkers believe that dry-hopping is one of craft beer's innovations. When, in fact, it's been practised or centuries.

Let's take a look at how the process worked in the late 19th century.

"It is usual to dry-hop the casks before filling, this preventing much frothing that would otherwise occur, although it necessitates a second topping over of beer, the dry hops absorbing a great deal of moisture. A certain amount of care is necessary in selecting hops for this purpose; they should be large, well matured, free from leaf, rich in condition, and of undoubted soundness, the twigs exhibiting the absence of mould, even when they are steeped in water, and the water examined microscopically."
"The Theory and Practice of Modern Brewing" by Frank Faulkner, 1888, page 227.

Obviously, you wouldn't use mouldy old hops or the purpose. That would just be asking for trouble.

Though it seems that not all brewers were keen on using whole hops, worrying about the clarity of their beer. Instead, they used lupulin.

"Some brewers object to the use of hops, saying that if beer becomes brisk, annoyance is experienced by the publican on account of minute fragments of flower or leaf floating about in the otherwise decently bright beer; but my own impression is, that if we investigate the exact composition of the so-called particles of hops, we shall find that instead of being so, the particles consist of conglomerated yeast cells. If brewers do experience such difficulty, it is quite easy to use a small quantity of lupulin for the purpose of hopping down, which they can procure for themselves by gently rubbing down the flower of hops upon a fine sieve."
"The Theory and Practice of Modern Brewing" by Frank Faulkner, 1888, pages 227-228.

Dr hops could produce cloudiness. Orr even turn a beer grey.

"Some little care is necessary in order to prevent cloudiness of beer through the over-use of new hops in cask, such variety yielding a very oleaginous extract for which no proper solvent exists in beer until ethereal products result from slow fermentation in cask.

I dare say most of my readers have noticed the peculiar grey shade that hangs upon heavily hopped pale beers during preliminary stages of storage, this seeming to be due to a larger quantity of oil existing than can be held in perfect solution by the small proportion of solid extract existing after fermentation; and this fact shows us that in spite of the strongly-marked antiseptic and protective agency of lupulin, or the condition of the hop-flower, in spite of the aid of hop-tannin, at the time of artificial fining it is undoubtedly a great mistake to over-hop running beers that are expected to be perfectly brilliant soon after being placed in the cellar of the publican; while it is just as necessary to heavily hop down stock and export beers that have to keep for prolonged periods of time."
"The Theory and Practice of Modern Brewing" by Frank Faulkner, 1888, page 228.

What a surprise. Running beers didn't need many dry hops. While beers to be stored a long time before sale needed loads.

Finally, some recommended dry-hopping rates:

"The quantity of hops usually employed for dry-hopping amounts to some 0.25lb. per barrel for beers of 20 to 22 grav.[1056-1061°], 0.5lb. from 22 to 26 [1061-1072°] , 0.75lb. to 1lb. for heavy beers ranking upwards from 27 [1072°]."
"The Theory and Practice of Modern Brewing" by Frank Faulkner, 1888, pages 228-229. 

Wasn't that fun? Not really, I suppose. At least for anyone other than me.

Rolling (but not rocking)

I'm not totally sure if, in this next section, Faulkner was referring to Running or Stock Beer. But it does talk about how to keep beer fully carbonated during storage.

Even a Running Bitter was likely to have at least two to four weeks conditioning in the brewery. During which time you'd want the beer to fully carbonate itself. Because which pub would want flat beer? (And for my more craftily-orientated readers, cask beer is not "flat", just with a sensible level of carbonation that won't leave you as bloated as a pregnant warthog after a pint and a half.)

On the other hand, you wouldn't want your cask getting overpressurised. And that's where venting comes in.

"For this reason, if beer be left quiescent and unaerated by “rolling," at a proper storage temperature — which in England, as I have said, is somewhere about 58° — the second fermentation is easily controlled or regulated by venting; and this is much more readily accomplished by the tight peg, eased as required, than by porous pegs, which are supposed to act automatically.

Briefly described, the venting process allows of carbonic acid escaping, when in excess, without any chance of aeration by exposure, and on this principle we have a ready means of preventing flatness of beer during the colder months of the year, since if nonaeration tend to retard cask fermentation, it is evident that motion facilitating mixture of air with beer must encourage it."
"The Theory and Practice of Modern Brewing" by Frank Faulkner, 1888, page 254.

He's talking about hard and soft spiles. The former being a solid piece of wood which completely seals the shive hole. Whereas the latter is a porous piece o wood which allows gas to escape (or enter) the cask without any human intervention.

Secondary fermentation in the cask could be a problem if the temperature was too low. And this is where rolling came in.

"Brewers frequently experience the following kind of annoyance when the normal temperature of the atmosphere tends to prevent early cask condition ; their beer racked of necessity fairly clean is immediately stacked, and, the temperature being low, no fermentation results, since the suspended yeast rapidly settles to the bottom of the cask, and remains dormant there on account of the lowness of store temperature.

Now, if we oppose this restrictive influence by the combined agency of motion and resulting aeration, we shall not only prevent the subsidence of yeast, but also bring it into vigorous vital condition, all this being easily done by a daily rolling of the beer for some little time after racking."
"The Theory and Practice of Modern Brewing" by Frank Faulkner, 1888, page 254.

Agitating the casks by rolling certainly is likely to liven the yeast up and get it eating again. Though rolling around all the casks in storage once a day is quite a lot of manual effort. Especially if there are hundreds of casks.

I've only come across one case of cask rolling. And I'm not even 100% sure that's really true. I heard that when Courage Russian Stout was being brewed in Tadcaster that it was filled into casks for secondaty fermentation. And every so often they'd kick the casks around the brewery yard to keep the fermentation going.
 

South America!

It's dead cool.

Let's Brew Wednesday - 1914 Cairnes Table Beer

I’m surprised that Cairnes were still brewing a Table Beer as late as 1914. In England, most brewers dropped the type not long after it disappeared as a tax category in 1830. Though it seems to have survived longer in Scotland: until around 1900.

The gravity has dropped quite a bit since 1898, from 1045º to 1033º. Leaving it extremely weak for a pre-WW I beer, at just a little over 3% ABV. And extremely weak for a beer in Ireland, where average OG was 1066º in 1914.

Like all Cairnes recipes, it’s pretty simple. Just base malt, flaked maize and sugar. Though there were two types of pale malt, one from Irish barley, the other from Indian barley.

The hops were split evenly between English and Oregon, both from the 1912 harvest. 

1914 Cairnes Table Beer
pale malt	5.00 lb	74.07%
flaked maize	0.75 lb	11.11%
No. 2 invert sugar	1.00 lb	14.81%
Cluster 120 mins	1.00 oz
Fuggles 60 mins	0.50 oz
Fuggles 30 mins	0.50 oz
OG	1033
FG	1007.5
ABV	3.37
Apparent attenuation	77.27%
IBU	36
SRM	6
Mash at	152º F
Sparge at	170º F
Boil time	120 minutes
pitching temp	57º F
Yeast	Wyeast 1084 Irish ale

Dublin porter for town trade

It seems that in Dublin they had their own particular way of handling beer for the pub trade. Specifically, Porter.

"Dublin porter for town trade
This is exampled in the case of Dublin porter, brewed for town trade. With such a beer, of no great stability, and which would not be consumed if flat, it is necessary to force on a cask fermentation to lead to immediate condition; and this is done by merely racking the beer in rooms kept moderately warm by steam pipes, the induced rise of temperature being quite sufficient to set in motion further fermentation, so long as the cask is tightly shived up. At one time there was a dispute as to whether it was advisable to regulate condition in cask or to allow cask fermentation full swing, the upholders of the latter idea asserting that under the great internal cask pressure the secondary fermentation was much more healthy, and was put an end to by pressure itself. I believe that there is a great deal of merit in such a notion, and if the stock beer existed in the cellar from which it was to be drawn, there is no doubt but that the beer fermented under such high-pressure conditions would be remarkably good if it could be tapped and consumed without any disturbance of the bottom deposit."
"The Theory and Practice of Modern Brewing" by Frank Faulkner, 1888, page 252.

That sounds very much like the highly-conditioned casks used in the two-cask serving system, which Guinness used or their Porter right up until it was discontinued in the early 1970s. It's interesting to learn exactly how they got the casks into that condition. Simply by racking the beer in a warm room.

This is what I'm talking about:

Faulkner wasn't impressed by this process. Asserting that the beer would only remain bright while the pressure was maintained. Something which wasn't possible when the beer was served and the cask partially emptied.

"As a practical question, the process is a faulty or impossible one; however bright the beer might be the extreme pressure would lead to immediate turbidity directly it was reduced, by diminishing quantity of fluid contents; while if the beer be stored for lengthy periods, the high pressure gradually disappears, much of the gas causing it passing through the pores of the wood, while the remainder is taken into solution, and when the cask is shipped away it is by no means full, and the contents exhibit but slight capacity of again becoming brisk, the violent fermentation that originally led to the pressure ending in excessive reduction of fermentable character, the high pressure very seriously influencing the vital power of the alcoholic cells present.
"The Theory and Practice of Modern Brewing" by Frank Faulkner, 1888, pages 252-253.

Not so sure that I understand the second half of that paragraph.

Handling public-house beer

More about how beer intended for pubs was handled.

Faulkner thought that the temperature pub beer was stored at in the brewery was really important. One clarification: why does he talk about cask beer specifically for the pub trade? Because a lot of casks were sold to private customers, to be served in their homes.

"In coming to the actual treatment of beer in store we have to consider for what purposes it is intended: if for stock it is naturally lowered into the basement, while if mild and for public-house use it remains either in racking-room or in store on ground level, since as the cellars of the publican are not, as a rule, of the best, with temperature restricted by their natural position, it is useless paying particular attention to such beers if at the end of a few hours they are to be moved away to the consumer. It has always seemed to me a point of extreme importance that such beers as are brewed expressly for public-house use should, during the colder months of the year, be kept at a moderately low temperature on the premises of the brewer, so as to escape those constant chills which frequently result in the cellars of the smaller publicans, which are mostly exposed to atmospheric influences. During the warmer months of the year we have to keep such beers as cool as possible so as to ward off a secondary fermentation, which is common to all beers alike, and which comes on sooner or later according to their exact quality, degree of fermentative capacity at the time of racking, and the variation of heat that may take place directly after racking."
"The Theory and Practice of Modern Brewing" by Frank Faulkner, 1888, pages 250-251.

It wasn't advised to store casks at too cool a temperature, because the pub cellars were likely to not be that cool. Except in the winter. I guess the idea was to store the casks in the brewery at as close a temperature to pub cellars as possible.

And what about in the summer?

"All beer, as I have said, contains carbonic acid, and in the case of such qualities as necessarily have to undergo fining it is important to prevent the collection of free carbonic acid in cask prior to the fining being carried out. For instance, if we happen to rack beer on a warm day, and the temperature of the racking-room facilitates rise of heat, a certain amount of carbonic acid is set free from the beer in cask, and if the bung or shive be out it readily passes off, while if the cask be tightly bunged or shived, the gas set free by the rise of heat accumulates, creates pressure and a variety of motion that acts very energetically in bringing on secondary change; and it is for this reason that beers of fermentative capacity require carefully venting immediately the casks are filled, when the temperature of the store naturally causes an increase in heat. If this is neglected it will be found that in many cases a determined secondary fermentation will set in at the end of a very few hours."
"The Theory and Practice of Modern Brewing" by Frank Faulkner, 1888, pages 251-252.

When it was warm and CO2 was coming out of solution, then you needed to vent the casks immediately after filling. Whichh makes sense.

Finings (part two)

Now here's an important question: when do you fine?

An obvious place to add finings would be in the racking tank. As that would be a good way of making sure they were mixed evenly through all the beer. But, for various reasons, Faulkner wasn't keen on that. Instead, he preferred to add them to the cask. And that could happen either in the brewery or in the pub cellar.

Nowadays, I don't think there are any brewers who would trust pub landlords to fine their beer correctly. In the past, it seems to have been commonplace.

"It may be asked, If the tank is unsuitable for fining operations, where should it be accomplished ? Now, I have spoken, among other matters, of London beers that are fined by the publican, and, in many large towns, more especially in the North of England, it is quite customary for the brewer to supply finings to the publican, which he applies as he thinks proper.

The London manipulation is, however, unique in its way, the finings practically being thrown out of the bung-hole on account of the beer itself being supplied to the houses in very fresh, and what I may term yeasty, condition; while, in the other towns mentioned, the beer is supplied very clean, and the finings go directly to the bottom, the cask being bunged tightly up."
"The Theory and Practice of Modern Brewing" by Frank Faulkner, 1888, pages 290-291.

That's something I've never heard before: that London beer was delivered in a very lively condition. I always thought that finings took stuff to the bottom of the cask, not expel it through the bunghole.

I wonder exactly what he means by "very clean". Does that mean it was pretty bright and free of yeast?

Let's Brew - 1914 Cairnes Mild Ale

Cairnes continued to brew a stronger Mild Ale. Though they had changed the name in the brewing record from simply “Ale” to “M. Ale”. And dropped the gravity by 5º.

At an English brewery, Mild Ale would have been by far the biggest seller. But that wasn’t the case here. Cairnes brewed fairly modest quantities of theirs. Though it was stronger than a standard English Mild Ale. Even London examples.

The biggest change since 1898 is the introduction of flaked maize. In general, the recipe is very similar to that of 2d Ale. Except that there’s half as much sugar. Which, presumably, left this beer with far more body. And quite a bit more colour.

There are equal quantities of Oregon and English hops. Both from 1913 harvest, so reasonably fresh.
 

1914 Cairnes Mild Ale
pale malt	10.25 lb	75.93%
flaked maize	2.00 lb	14.81%
glucose	1.25 lb	9.26%
Cluster 120 mins	2.25 oz
Fuggles 60 mins	1.00 oz
Fuggles 30 mins	1.00 oz
OG	1062
FG	1022
ABV	5.29
Apparent attenuation	64.52%
IBU	64
SRM	4.5
Mash at	153º F
Sparge at	170º F
Boil time	120 minutes
pitching temp	58.75º F
Yeast	Wyeast 1084 Irish ale

 

Finings

Another important process was fining. And another one which has a surprisingly long history. The use of isinglass going back until at least to the 17th century. Though, even after its introduction, beer which underwent a long secondary fermentation was still expected to drop bright without finings.

"In coming to the question of fining, we are face to face with a matter requiring thorough investigation, for the use of an artificial fining material has simply revolutionised brewing operations; for whereas some few years ago public taste was in favour of aged beer, and as very lengthy storage of the unfined beer in bulk was necessary to ensure brightness, a vast amount of capital was consequently locked up during such period, while, at the present time, I should say two-thirds of the beer produced in England is consumed within a month of its production, forced into a condition of brightness by artificial means."
"The Theory and Practice of Modern Brewing" by Frank Faulkner, 1888, page 229.

It's a sign of the decline in the popularity of aged beer that two-thirds of beer was sold withing a couple of weeks. At the start of the 19th century, the situation was very different. Especially with the popularity of Porter.

Isinglass, it seems, was superior to other fining agents. Which I guess is why it's still being used.

 "So far as I remember, the introduction of isinglass as a fining material was the primary cause of the complete change in modus operandi spoken of, for all previous artificial methods, such as the use of silver sand, alum, and so forth, were singularly ineffectual by comparison, and the beer so clarified was not calculated to impress people by its degree of brilliancy and early palate character; for I know of nothing that interferes so much with the delicate flavour of beer, especially of that of only moderate gravity, as the semi-cloudiness which means a very intimate kind of connection existing between the amorphous matter and yeast in suspension in the weak alcoholic fluid."
"The Theory and Practice of Modern Brewing" by Frank Faulkner, 1888, page 229.

It seems that the use of finings was important for the development of Mild Ale.

". . . it was only after the introduction of gelatine as a combined chemical and mechanical fining agent that brilliancy was attainable, and a mild beer produced fit for consumption almost directly after fermentation was complete."
"The Theory and Practice of Modern Brewing" by Frank Faulkner, 1888, page 230.

Which pretty much describes the way 20th-century Mild was handled.